“Gun Nut” James Yeager Poster Child for Civilian Disarmanent

We called this: since his “death to gun grabbers” YouTube video, Tactical Response jefe James Yeager has become the poster child for those who would see Americans disarmed. As has been said many times before, the only cure for hate speech—even “ours”—is good speech. The Firearms Policy Coalition and the NRA are launching PR campaigns (post next hour) in the next few days. And we’re here, nearasdammit 24/7, reporting on the efforts to extend and defend your Constitutionally protected right to keep and bear arms. And you’re there, doing what you do, promoting safe and responsible gun ownership by word and deed. Will it be enough? For Mr. Ed nothing will ever be enough to convince him that the Second Amendment means what it says, and for good reason. For the fence sitters, well, we’ll see . . .

 

avatar

About Robert Farago

Robert Farago is the Publisher of The Truth About Guns (TTAG). He started the site to explore the ethics, morality, business, politics, culture, technology, practice, strategy, dangers and fun of guns.

212 Responses to “Gun Nut” James Yeager Poster Child for Civilian Disarmanent

  1. avatarJoke & Dagger says:

    Buck Yeager is either a master of free publicity or a ticking time bomb. I vote the former.

    • avatarRob Pincus says:

      Yes, I think the former is much closer.

      He has backpedaled, lawyered up and realized that his original video and statements were a HUGE mistake.

      Making ridiculous statements, ranting empty threats and posting hyperbolic statements only harms our cause.

      Think before your speak/write/post. I’m sure Yeager wishes he had acted more wisely.

      -RJP

      • avatarrexj jones says:

        Hey rob I thought you and yeager were tight buds. Together calling people ass clowns and such

    • avatarMike Aguilar says:

      I vote the latter. He is a poster child for mental health issues being reason to revoke the right to own weapons.

    • avatarAPBTFan says:

      More maturing and less juicing would serve him well.

  2. avatarKaliope says:

    That’s it. We’re boned. We aren’t allowed to express any outrage at all, yet the anti-gunners can scream and shout and rip their clothing in anger.

    Anger is a luxury afforded only to those who would disarm us.

    • avatarOld Ben turning in grave says:

      Classic Saul Alinsky…right by the book. Hold your enemy to standards to which you don’t hold yourself. What about all the leftist asshats wanting NRA members to be shot, or all gun owners rounded up and put in jail? I bet for every Yeager we could find 100s of leftists shouting for violence. That’s just the way they play, and have always played. If you haven’t read Alinsky’s Rules for Radicals, you should. It’s the Progressive bible, complete with a dedication to Satan in the intro. I kid you not.

      • avatarMikeP says:

        My understanding is that in recent printings of RFR, they’ve scrubbed the intro hat-tip to Lucifer. I’ve also heard they scrubbed references to Frank Marshall Davis in “Dreams from my Father” about the same time. So get a used copy a couple of years old or more.

        • avatarSaul Feldstein says:

          Newtown CT is the east coast headquarters for the Church of Satan.

          30 days have passed and there is not ONE picture or video clip of Adam Lanza arriving at or entering Sandy Hook school.

          The press reported Lanza “played violent video games” non stop but later admitted his computer hard drives were all completely destroyed, rendering such a statement impossible.

          Locals have said Lanza didnt drive, his mother drove him everywhere.

          What there has been from Newtown CT the headquarters of the Church of Satan is an INCREDIBLE amount of conflicting un vetted “information” from “officials” and the overwhelming demand for gun confiscation.

          Doesnt take a tin foil hat to think something is wrong with this picture, even if you buy into the “official” story.

      • avatarMike Aguilar says:

        I’ve never seen anything that stated anyone thinks gun owners need to be rounded up and jailed or wanting NRA members to be shot. You need to stop letting others do your thinking and start doing some for yourself. IF you’re still capable of independent thought, that is. I have my doubts.

        • avatarMichael Martinez says:

          @Mike Aguilar Just because YOU didn’t see or hear of it doesn’t mean it didn’t happen. You may be important in your mind but in the real world or even here on TTAG you’re a nobody. It looks like the only one here that is incapable of independent thoughts is you. Not everyone is as ignorant as you are. Perhaps you need to research and get up to date before spouting off ridiculous comments like that again.

        • avatarMike Aguilar says:

          Ok. Show me the proof that any of what I doubt occurred did in fact occur. PROOF. Not “”I saw…….” Show me that actual links. Until then, you’re full of the proverbial male bovine excrement product.

        • avatarThomasR says:

          Hey Mike Aguilar, google Don Kaul, a liberal journalist out of Iowa, he calls for the killing of gun owners and the senators Boehner and Mconnel be dragged behind a pick up truck.

        • avatarMike Aguilar says:

          Yeah, couldn’t find anything about that on what I consider a trustworthy source. Just the hate- and fear-filled right wing bullshit blogs and so-called “news” sources. |

          But, I’ll give you the benefit of the doubt. ONE person. Yet, you say that ONE person speaks for everyone, that everyone thinks the way that ONE person does.

          Think about it. How STUPID is that?

          That’s like me, as the grandson of a Mexican that came her completely legally, saying that because *I* think all illegals should be deported immediately, no matter the cost to the gov’t, ALL Mexican-Americans think that way. Would you say that that would be a correct statement? Or that I’m even in the majority of American citizens of Mexican descent? Or do most Americans of Mexican descent side with illegals?

        • avatarLeo338 says:

          It was not just one person that has called for some sort of violence. There are several stories out there and they are not from other sources, you can read them straight from the horses mouth. All this information out there on the Internet yet you “Couldn’t find anything about that”. I had always assumed the Internet was a fairly simple tool to use, I guess it’s just too complicated for the mentally challenged like you.

        • avatarMike Aguilar says:

          Oh, so you’re actually talking about those wannabe terrorists that said something about teaching people “a second amendment solution” ? Gotcha

        • avatarWLCE says:

          mike aguilar is right. right on the money.

          just because they do it, doesnt mean we have to do it.

          we all know we should be different people with our guns, hold ourselves to higher standards. there’s no such thing as angry rhetoric or rash decision making. when you are armed your behavior should be scientific, rational, and objective.

          my only regret is that i laughed at james’ behavior, denouncing it. the implications are potentially severe for all of us and WE know that the media is lopsided.

      • avatarpat says:

        Yup. Liberalism is a mental disorder.

        • avatarMike Aguilar says:

          You’d bet. And you’d lose.

          Let’s start. We already have Yeager. So we need your list of 100 so-called “leftists” or “liberals” shouting for violence.

          And a couple years ago there was the Tea Party activist saying he wanted a 2nd Amendment solution to people that wanted to take his guns away.

          So, now we need a list of 200 VERIFIABLE instances where “leftists” or “liberals” have been shouting for violence.

        • avatarpat says:

          All the presidents were killed by leftists. Look it up, holmes.

        • avatarMike Aguilar says:

          Really?

          John Wilkes Booth: Southern Democrat right winger. From before the time when GOP and Dem switched left and right.

          William McKinley was shot by Leon Czolgolz, an anarchist, not a leftist.

          JFK was killed by the CIA for failing to live up to his promise of air support for the Cuban rebels. Last I heard, the CIA was pretty freaking right wing.

          I’d call that a failure to understand history, pat.

        • avatarpat says:

          Wrong. Lets keep it to the 20th century, when communism and marxist crap really got cooking.
          Your masterbating with history by not assigning at least some (most, if not all) to your commie boy Lee.

    • avatarScott Henrichs says:

      There are many ways to get a point across without sounding like a nutjob. We all laugh at Piers Morgan because of his behavior. He has toned it down because he figured out people thought he was a nut. While we may agree with some or all of what James said we don’t go around posting videos of it because it wouldn’t end well. The net is a double edged sword in that while it is easy to get information out it is also easy to publish work that isn’t our best. He hit publish without cooling off first and now he is paying for it. Sadly it will cost him for a long time. Not very many people are going to get training from someone whose made themselves a liability. Sad because while I don’t agree with all his methods he does have a lot to offer the firearms community.

    • avatarMike Aguilar says:

      You can rant and rave all you want, but when you start threatening violence against other people, it becomes a felony known as terrorist threats. Plain and simple. A 5th grader with a brain can see that.

      • avatarHal says:

        Even a Dem Politician actually tweeted that NRA members should be shot. There was a post on this very site about it a couple weeks ago.

        We are subjected to a double standard. Yeager makes one video, it goes to MSNBC. Hundreds of tweets calling for the death of firearm owners and NRA members? Why cover that?

        • avatarWLCE says:

          i dont give a shit what dem politicians and anti-gunners do. theyre not the ones with guns LOL.

          but we are. that means we should hold ourselves to a higher standard.

        • avatarMike Aguilar says:

          Oh. So, I’m supposed to believe something from someone that think bullshit is actually nutritious? Ok. But,I’m sorry, I don’t have enough to buy that bridge you’re selling in the desert.

      • avatarDaniel Silverman says:

        There are numerous instances, Piers Morgan with Buzz from the daily beast, as well as others. It is really not difficult to find if you choose to.
        Go on to CNN and read the responses from individuals. While this is not considered an accurate source, but it certainly describes a sentiment.
        We here in TTAG were the first to state the rant was not in the best interest of gun owners or the public in general. James Yeager’s statement was generalized, and heated, but it was not directed to any specific individual. A terrorist threat needs to be directed at something or someone. A threat to an organization or or individual. James’s comment was simply directed outward, but there is no definable target. Other comments made on national television and other places have been rather pointed and directed. Even if made behind some sort of quirk or scoff, it is a threat none the less.

        • avatarMike Aguilar says:

          Actually, no. Read the federal law. It states there only has to be a threat. I’m guessing that “I’m going to start killing people” qualifies as a threat.

          It REALLY helps if you know what the actual law states and what the SCOTUS thinks BEFORE you make yourself look like a real idiot. Then again, maybe you like looking like an idiot. I don’t know you,so I can’t be sure.

    • avatarTotenglocke says:

      Not just anger, they also get to publicly promote murdering anyone they disagree with and that’s OK. But if someone they don’t like makes a similar statement, they’re a horrible person and have their life ruined.

  3. avatarMr Pierogie says:

    Ed is full of crap and anybody who agrees with him is already in the anti-gun crowd, but did anybody NOT see this coming? It was just a matter of time before the MSM picked up Yeager’s videos and used them against us. Thanks for nothing James.

    • avatarMike Aguilar says:

      I agree with Ed, but I wholeheartedly support the responsible private ownership of guns with a legitimate civilian use.

      • avatar16V says:

        The “legitimate” use is specified in the 2A. Perhaps you should read some of the articles about what that use is.

        • avatarMike Aguilar says:

          As an ex-member of the military with an IQ of over 150, can guarantee I understand it better than you.

        • avatar16V says:

          I’d explain the childishness of posting IQ numbers, but it’d likely go over your head. I’m a former Son of the American Revolution member just like I’m a former triplenine member – I get bored with clubs.

          Just don’t ever whip out that keen legal insight in a room full of lawyers, they’ll pat you on the head, chuckle, and then send you to fetch more scotch.

        • avatarWLCE says:

          “Just don’t ever whip out that keen legal insight in a room full of lawyers, they’ll pat you on the head, chuckle, and then send you to fetch more scotch.”

          LMAO!!!

          I hate lawyers (im just kidding, dont offer to break my spine in half for that comment ((everybody hates lawyers until they’re fighting for their life in the courtroom)) and i thought that was funny.

      • avatarWLCE says:

        depends on what you mean by legitimate civilian use.

        to have the arms of the military and defend from tyranny? that is legitimate enough for me :D

        • avatarpat says:

          So true.

        • avatarMike Aguilar says:

          You’d be bringing a knife to a gunfight. Thinking that your little arsenal is going to do any good if the government decides it wants to take over in dictatorial style and is able to convince the military to go get people like you, is stupid. Your 1 little gun versus an Abrams. Yep. That’s going to work. Or a Hellfire missile.

        • avatarWLCE says:

          erm… we lost two wars in nations smaller than the size of california…to a few thousand insurgents with small arms and HME (thats homemade explosives for you civvies).

          have you heard of the snowball effect? 4th generation warfare (reference John Poole)?

          obviously not. this “2nd amendment and AR15 are useless against M1 Abrams tanks and B2 bombers” is a stupid argument that has been refuted countless times.

          anybody that has read a history book or served in the armed forces in any capacity in combat arms (especially light infantry reconnaissance and special operations) is aware of this.

        • avatarMike Aguilar says:

          Yeah. Ok. You play with your little toy against an Abrams. I’ll use my brain to think of something more effective. IF the time were ever to come. I highly doubt any US gov’t would be able to convince the military to attack civilians in the fashion you’re dreaming about. If the need arises, the military will be right next to us, because (GASP!) they’re citizens and in the same boat as we are.

      • avatarpat says:

        Aguilar, if you agree with ‘fat’ Ed you are a libtard.

        • avatarMike Aguilar says:

          Better to be a “liberal” than a Re-THUG-nican with no brains.

          Agreeing with obese Rush makes you an idiot with a less than room temperature IQ. At least Ed gives me room to think for myself.

        • avatarpat says:

          But you did not understand the asymetrical (gorilla) warfare consept.
          You lose

        • avatarMike Aguilar says:

          I would guess that receiving training in countering it from some of the best minds in the field means I understand it better than you. But you just go ahead and keep that over-inflated sense of self-worth, Pat. It may help you some day.

        • avatarpat says:

          You keep failing. In the statements above you keep harping about ‘the Abrams’ several times. Asymetrical (Gorilla) warfare dont need that, silly, and you would know this if you were such a Jedi master regarding the art of war. The semiauto rifle/detachable magazine interface is the backbone of any patriotic gorilla resistance against a potential future regime.

      • avatarColton says:

        Then what the hell do you consider legitimate use? Hunting? Lets not lose track of the task at hand, with all do respect the 2nd ammendment isnt just hunting and self defense, its defense against a tyranical gov’t. Supporting any ati gun cause only hurts this country because people including the president wont stop at mags, or a full out A.W.B. They want an all out disarmed puplic, and the United States of America Will Not let that Happen! By the way I’m thirteen, young does’nt mean stupid.

        • avatarMike Aguilar says:

          Nobody outside police or law enforcement needs an assault rifle. They were designed with one purpose in mind and they are only good for one thing.

          For hunting and (maybe) home defense, a nice semi- or bolt action 5 round capacity.30-06. For home and personal defense a Glock or Beretta or, preferably, an S&W revolver.

          If you need more than 6 rounds to hit your target, you don’t need a gun, you need a fortress that’s impregnable, because you’re hopeless.

  4. avatarStevieY43 says:

    It strikes me as curious that as a response to Yeager being a “threat”, they take away his little piece of paper. If he was really a threat and not just someone who talks, wouldn’t it be more logical to take away his guns? I’m sure a reason (BS or otherwise) could be made to support that if he was really threatening.
    Since they just took away his permit/license/whatever, this sounds kind of like a publicity stunt.

    • avatarRalph says:

      Yeager made no specific threat of any kind. All he did was exercise his First Amendment right to express his anger, for which he was punished.

      We have a First Amendment right to agree with the government, or to disagree as long as we do so quietly, humbly and while genuflecting like good subjects. In other words, the First Amendment means nothing.

      • avatarBob says:

        Yeager made no specific threat of any kind.

        “If it goes one inch further, I’m going to start killing people.”

        Threat: an expression of intention to inflict evil, injury, or damage.

        Maybe not a “specific” threat…

        • avatarRalph says:

          No, Bob, that’s not a specific threat. If it was, yeager would have been arrested.

        • What semantic crap are you trying to pull now, Ralph. It wasn’t a SPECIFIC threat, it was a GENERAL one? He didn’t say he’d kill a SPECIFIC person. Is that your game, lawyer?

        • avatar16V says:

          As much as it’s pointless responding to mike, that’s the legal construct. It has to be an actual specific threat.

          Out in the real world, people say “I’m gonna kill you/her/him/them/it” all the time. It’s a figure of speech, with a certain dramatic flair, nothing more.

          One of the basics of law, and often the hardest to prove, is intent. Attempting to use those vids as mens rea of a real threat, is more than a bit of a stretch. Were some grandstander DA to charge him, Yaeger would either amuse a jury as a complete over-the-top tactifool, or scare them just because they actually fall for his schtick.

        • avatarMike Aguilar says:

          Wrong numb nuts. It really helps knowing what this little thing called “the actual law” has to day.

          Next time you DON’T want to sound like a room temp idiot, look up the law BEFORE you speak. That way, even less than room temp idiots MIGHT think you have something of a clue. Even if, like now, you don’t.

          Word to wise, DON’T try to argue with someone that has an IQ 3 times yours.

        • avatar16V says:

          Did we do something bad to the genepool of ‘Mikes’ or what?

          I’m quite aware of the actual legal definitions of intent (there’s at least 3 of them depending on things you have demonstrated you aren’t even aware of, let alone understand).

          Once again rocket surgeon, do break out a Black’s (law dictionary since you are obviously clueless as to what intent or mens reas is ).

          BTW- Your IQ is north of 500? I am SO impressed!

        • avatarMike Aguilar says:

          Accur81: Are you white? Black? Asian? If so, you’re not really full-blooded American, now are you? You MAY have been born in the States to parents that are citizens, but unless BOTH of your parents are full-blooded Native Americans, like my dad’s grandmother, you’re not full-blooded, you’re just native born.

          Thank you for your service.

      • avatarRacer X says:

        I do find it highly ironic when those among us try to defend the 2A with a complete lack of understanding of the 1A.The 1A doesn’t protect you from being punished for your speech, you have the right to heard, that does mean your words won’t have consequences.

        • avatarAccur81 says:

          Definitely. What Mr. Yeager is experiencing is a consequence. Posting “If it goes any further, I’m going to start killing people” in a Post-Newtown/Aurora world is incredibly stupid. Some might call that type of thing a warning sign. I agreed with the most of what he said, other than his last statement.

          Gun grabbers are waiting for us to make mistakes. Stay frosty.

        • avatarMike Aguilar says:

          There are no gun grabbers except in your delusions.

        • avatarAccur81 says:

          Mike Aguilar,

          If you don’t think Feinstein is a gun grabber than I don’t have much hope for your powers of perception. There are many other sources such as the Brady Campaign, Bloomberg, and the entire Chicago political system.

          Unless you’re joking with me, and I’m telling you something that you already know.

        • avatarMike Aguilar says:

          Well, I’ve done this novel thing called actually reading the submitted legislation. It gives you a good idea of what the legislator is trying to do. I also do this novel thing called not letting a biased agency or organization for my thinking for me. I’m kinda doubting your capable of it.

        • avatarWLCE says:

          racer x, you hit a good point

          “The 1A doesn’t protect you from being punished for your speech, you have the right to heard, that does mean your words won’t have consequences.”

          Similarly, the 2nd amendment doesnt guarantee protection from punishment after using force against the tyrannical powers to be.

          That is why Yeager pisses me off. he seems enthusiastic for going to civil war and Im personally not. Ive seen three different wars and i couldnt imagine the horror on my own homeland against my fellow americans.

    • avatarMike Aguilar says:

      Actually, they should have taken away his paper, his guns, and his freedom and locked him up in the closest insane asylum. For about a decade. A frontal lobotomy might have been a good idea, too.

  5. avatarTom jones says:

    It’s James tho we know he says crazy shit. This is a gaint misunderstanding.

    • avatargyrfalcon says:

      Would it also be a giant misunderstanding if someone got killed because James thinks it’s okay to have a person downrange taking photos on a live fire range?

      The guy is a basket case, who unfortunately has a popular youtube channel.

      • avatarMike Aguilar says:

        Yes, he is a basket case. And unfortunately he has youtube channel AND a following of fellow basket cases.

  6. All Ed said was we need sensible gun laws and that there are lots of Yeagers out there. Both true.

    • avatarKaliope says:

      Neither are true, unless by “sensible gun laws” you mean repealing the 1934 NFA, the Gun-Free School zones acts, and the 1968 Gun Control Act.

    • avatarRalph says:

      “We?” Who the f^ck are “we?” You don’t live here, you live in Italy, so you are not part of “we.” And don’t tell me that you’re an American. You’re as American as Benedict Arnold.

    • I’d actually love to hear what you consider to be sensible gun control laws. Did you already have a post on that? if not, could you write one?

      • You must be joking, Nick. Are you that stuck in the echo chamber?

        http://mikeb302000.blogspot.it/2012/09/what-do-we-mean-by-proper-gun-control.html

        I’m gonna rewrite that to include a safe storage requirement also.

        • Not stuck in the echo chamber, I just rarely find a reason to ever visit your blog…

          You made some (some) logical sense until the local authorities bit.

          Illustrative example of why that is bad: Texas is an NFA friendly state. But Bexar County’s former sheriff refused to sign off on any paperwork (NFA transfers require LEO sign-off). It created a de facto ban on NFA items in one location that conflicted with the State’s position. If we apply that same requirement nationwide, then we start seeing massive disenfranchisement just because the CLEO is a dick and not for any due cause.

          There’s also that whole point about Canada scrapping their registration not too long ago because it was a complete and total waste of resources for no gains whatsoever. Explain to me exactly how a registry would help.

        • Selective examples of abuse of the “may issue” policy is not reason to scrap it. Oversight can be set up to eliminate the abuse. The benefits are obvious. Dangerous people who come of age are known to the local authorities. They need to be restricted.

          Registration was eliminated in Canada but it wasn’t the complete failure that you guys keep saying. It could be done properly here and along with the licensing of gun owners it would practically eliminate straw purchasing.

        • avatarRobert Farago says:

          Do you have any idea how creepy the phrase “known to the authorities” is?

        • Yeah, that is creepy. But you know what I mean. I’m thinking about small towns all over the US where the cops know the people. The police are in a unique position to make a quality decision about this and there’s no reason the abuses you keep talking about cannot be avoided.

        • avatarRobert Farago says:

          Any man who trusts the police doesn’t have much experience in that regard. Am I right Mike?

        • No, you’re not.

        • avatarMike Aguilar says:

          That depends on how seriously the police take their oath and the law.

        • avatarDavid W. says:

          Okay lets do it!

          Number 1. Illegal under FOPA
          Number 2. Illegal under FOPA, massively expensive, would require more police in offices than on the street
          Number 3. Probably not illegal, but over all pretty dumb, criminals will just steal/buy illegally anyway (which is already illegal, making it more illegal won’t change it), and it only affects law abiding gun owners.
          Number 4. I don’t really understand how a criminal stealing a gun, or buying on a street, will wait three days before gaining control of the gun… But hey, magic unicorns ridden by all seeing-all knowing cops will be everywhere, so no worry right?
          Number 5. Explain to me how that will stop crime? May Issue is usually either No-issue or Shall-issue in practice, with higher crime places being no-issue, and less crime places being shall-issue.
          Number 6. Illegal under McDonald, Heller.

          Every single one of your ideas will NOT stop crime. Will make it easier from criminals to do their thing.
          Therefore INCREASING crime rates.

          Allowing more gun control to happen.

          That is why your side won’t protect the children, them dying helps your cause, and sadly the ones controlling your cause knows that, and doesn’t care if a bunch of kids die, as long as they can use their deaths as a way to increase more gun control. You need kids to die to get anywhere politically, otherwise you loose, so why would your side protect kids?

        • You dismissed half of my ideas saying simply that they’re illegal. Well, that’s the point. The law needs to change. I already explained how this would reduce violence.

        • avatarWiebelhaus says:

          Douchebag troll is trolling, let’s not feed please.

        • avatar16V says:

          I take serious issue with Ralph’s characterization of mikeyb as ” as American as Benedict Arnold”.

          Benedict Arnold started off on our side, was by most accounts very talented and skilled leader and warrior. He turned traitor only after the (real or perceived) slights by the Continental Congress, as well as some pessimism about the final outcome of the Revolution.

          I seriously doubt mikeyb has made of the positive contributions to the US that Arnold had before he turned traitor.

        • avatarWLCE says:

          “Selective examples of abuse of the “may issue” policy is not reason to scrap it. Oversight can be set up to eliminate the abuse.”

          so your logic is dont throw the baby out with the bathwater. i see your point. i also disagree. i think you are doing the same.

          “The benefits are obvious. Dangerous people who come of age are known to the local authorities. They need to be restricted.”

          …which ultimately restricts the overwhelming majority that do nothing wrong. collective punishment is never a beneficial thing in a republic and does happen out of stupidity.

    • avatarSammy says:

      Like I asked before, Mike , do you whistle the song from “Cheers” when you log on here?

    • avatarmatt says:

      I wouldn’t say there are lots of Yeagers out there, but there are plenty who idolize him.

  7. avatarRalph says:

    Yeager vented his spleen, exercised his First Amendment right to be inarticulate and angry, made NO specific threat to anyone, but got his license pulled anyway.

    See, the Second Amendment does not protect the First because there is no First. It’s an illusion, a sham. People like Yeager have the right to express themselves until the G says otherwise. People like the Hutaree Militia, who did nothing wrong, had the right to freedom of association until the G said otherwise. The kids at Cranston West High School had the right to freedom of religion until the G said otherwise (see Ahlquist v. Cranston).

    The First Amendment is dead — unless you’re a pornographer. All that’s left is of the First Amendment a bone that the powers toss us from time to time so we’ll feel good and do what we’re told. The First Amendment is a lie.

    • avatarMike Aguilar says:

      Saying “I’m going to start killing people” is a threat. He doesn’t have to say “I’m going to kill this person and that person.” for it to be illegal. If you knew enough about the Constitution and how SCOTUS has interpreted it over the years, you’d be aware of that fact.

    • avatarAccur81 says:

      Ralph,

      If I’m out on the street, and someone yells ” I’m gonna start killing people,” then I’m going to arrest them. If I’m off duty, and someone yells “I’m gonna start killing people,” I’m going I’m going to call the police and follow them. If not CA PC 422, then disturbing the peace or a 5150 W&I might be applicable. The city attorney or DA will go from there, based upon their opinions and the totality of the circumstances.

      Also, Yeager’s outburst has significantly set our cause back. I don’t appreciate that. I don’t support his general death threat video, but I do appreciate his zeal. He just needs to temper his enthusiasm with a healthy dose of judgement. Without judgement, a CCW is a liability.

      • avatarDaniel Silverman says:

        Mike earlier stated it was a terrorist threat which I don’t think is the case. If we are asking was it a threat, well duh! But it wasn’t directed, so for it to be a terrorist threat it needs to be directed.
        If James, using this as some twisted example, were to go off. If I was standing next to him holding a rifle I don’t think I would be the target. In fact it is difficult to accurately define his target. Thus a stupid rant, yes. A directed terrorist threat no. Would he possibly be detained or otherwise questioned, yup.
        Has he actually committed any crime, nope, unless you consider being upset and speaking his mind a crime.

        • avatarMike Aguilar says:

          Really? Tell that to my good friend who is currently doing 5-10 in Pelican Bay for saying he’d kill anyone who thought they could take his guns. His charge? Terrorist threats.

          Or, you could tell my other friend, who’s doing 25 for a terrorist threat: “I’ll kill the motherfucker!” is what HE said. He owned a gun.

        • avatarMike Aguilar says:

          A long, long time ago, I used to make statements like this. But then, I was made to look as stupid as you a couple of times. After that before opening my mouth, I went and did this wondrous thing called RESEARCH. I looked up laws and how they’ve been interpreted by the courts.

          If you’d done that, I wouldn’t be sitting here imitating you by banging my fist against my chest and screaming unintelligible grunts

        • avatar16V says:

          Mike,

          Apparently your studies have not included US law. Please look up what the legal term “intention” means.

          Black’s Law is available at any library if you don’t have one at home. In fact, a rather simple synopsis is available on wiki.

        • avatarMike Aguilar says:

          Black’s Law is nice. But, when some less than zero IQ fool says, “I’m going to start killing people” try and find a jury that doesn’t feel included in that statement.

        • avatarLeo338 says:

          HAHA this Mike guy cracks me up. He does research AKA Google Fu, and now thinks he is some intellectual. He claims to do research, yet he admitted he couldn’t find anything on anti’s calling for murder of NRA members. Mike, you can’t even research stories on this site properly, are we supposed to trust any other research you claim to have done? Perhaps he was one of the “special” students, the ones that were locked away in barracks in the back of the school yard. I wonder if he knows some of the regular readers/posters on here are in fact lawyers.

        • avatarMike Aguilar says:

          Actually, dumbass, my research is the Thomas.Library of Congress website when it comes to federal legislation and state legislature websites.

          By the way, I make my living 7 days a week doing research online, what do YOU do?

        • avatar16V says:

          Well Mike, as Black’s isn’t available online, and you neither live in our country nor have a clue, we’ll all just chuckle at your troll attempts.

        • avatarMike Aguilar says:

          Well, considering that I currently have two friends sitting in prison for saying pretty much the same EXACT thing, minus the “if it goes one step further”, I’ll chuckle at your strawman attempt. No, they weren’t talking about going out and committing mass murder because of gun control attempts.

      • avatarMike Aguilar says:

        Actually, it is not disturbing the peace in my home state of California, it is a terrorist threat

        • avatarMike Aguilar says:

          Leo38″ Nice try. I doubt even 1 in 100 of you idiot regular posters knows anything beyond what Cracker Jack gave you.

          When a clear and defined threat is made, that’s a felony. Plain and simple. Unless, of course, your age is higher than your IQ.

          P.S. As a professional writer, I do more research in an hour than you’ve done in your whole life.

  8. avatarGoldenboy says:

    By taking away his permit, it gives them a reason to take away his guns if he is ever caught carrying a gun in public.

    • avatarRob Pincus says:

      Truth.

      …and it also sends a nasty “oh, really, let’s see?” message.

      • avatarAccur81 says:

        And I would love to take one of your classes, if you are in fact the real Rob Pincus.

        • avatarMike Aguilar says:

          @Accur81: Yes, they did. Because MARTIAL LAW had been declared. Because people were shooting each other, there was looting, and violence in the streets in the aftermath of a major natural disaster. What part of the above didn’t you understand? Lt me know. As a teacher of ESL, I’ll use basic basic language (read kindergarten English)to explain it to you.

        • avatar16V says:

          Mike, Once you get past mastering kindergarten English and learn to read on a high school level, then you should take up reading the US Constitution, Bill of Rights, and the Declaration of Independence.

          Declaration of martial law has no implicit, let alone required, confiscation of private firearms.

        • avatarMike Aguilar says:

          Really. Maybe I should try and pull the wool over my ESL students’ eyes with that bullshit. Then again, as a teacher, I tend to only teach my students the truth. SO, I won’t recommend they come her. Most of you are full of shit.

          LOL. Acurr81, I guess that’s why I’m making more as an ESL teacher than you are at your regular job, huh?

        • avatarAccur81 says:

          Mike,

          With “Lt me know” and your use of “basic basic language,” you’re not going to be a good candidate for ESL instruction any time soon.

    • avatarDavid W. says:

      In Ohio, carrying a concealed weapon isn’t a felony, nor is it a prohibition on getting a CCW permit. I doubt Yeager lives in a rabid anti-gun state so if he does carry, it will probably be along the lines of a fine and community service or something.

  9. avatarGoodbarrel says:

    While society greatly needs to hear the voices of those who can articulate the message with excellence, don’t underestimate the power of passion. Truth, regardless of the package whereby it is delivered, can have an awakening effect. I believe that many, many “respectable” folks privately related to what James Yeager said, although they realize he went a over the edge with his words. The passion is powerful. Millions of people are waking up, from all walks of life and social status. I know I am.

    • avatarRalph says:

      he went a over the edge with his words

      The whole purpose of the First Amendment is to allow people to go over the edge with their words. Popular speech doesn’t need protection. Unpopular, angry, pointed, “over the edge” speech does. If over the edge speech isn’t protected, then the First Amendment is dead.

      • avatarGoodbarrel says:

        I wasn’t addressing his right to speak, I was addressing the effectiveness of his message.

      • avatarJoe Tauke says:

        You aren’t allowed to make threats like, “I’m gonna start killing people”. Just like you can’t yell fire in a movie theater.

        • avatarSaul Feldstein says:

          Semantically speaking, and the officials and lawyers know this, his statement was couched by the pretext “if this goes one inch further.”

        • avatarRalph says:

          Sorry, Joe Tauke, but Yeager was entitled to make such a speech. His statement was completely nebulous and targeted nobody. His statement is absolutely protected speech and in no way violated any law. Which is why Yeager wasn’t arrested.

          And BTW, you certainly can yell “fire” in a crowded theater. Think about it and you’ll understand. Justice Holmes also said that the freedom to swing his fist ended with the other guy’s nose, which was also incorrect. Holmes was a master of statements that sounded smart but were actually stupid.

        • avatarTotenglocke says:

          You can yell “fire!” in a theater all you want – it’s only a crime if people get hurt (you might get fined if the theater loses money as a result and no one is hurt). Besides, the government tells us all the time “Do X one more time, and we’re gonna start killing people!” – why aren’t the peasants allowed to say a similar statement?

        • avatarMike Aguilar says:

          Hey idiot, when does the gov’t say ANYTHING like that?

          I can’t believe the utter stupidity of most people on this board.

          NOBODY is coming to take your preciousssssss gunsssssss. If you believe they are, you’re an idiot.

        • avatarJoke & Dagger says:

          I can see why you are only half American, Mike.

        • avatarMike Aguilar says:

          LOL. That’s funny. My grandmother was Mescalero Apache. If THAT isn’t completely American, I don’t know what the f*&k is. I’m probably more “American” than anyone here.

          Let me ask you this:How many years of active military service do you have? Can you compare to my 5 years? Didn’t think so. Not to mention my 5 years of Reserve service after that.
          My American/Brazilian flag means that last year (my 46th) I moved to Brazil to live with my girlfriend.

          Just so you understand completely (hopefully) what that means, is that I was born and raised in the US, served in the US military for a total of 10 years, and moved her to Brazil in the last 7 months.

          Might be a good idea if you would one of these days learn to think for yourself. I’m not going to hold my breath for that though.

        • avatarTotenglocke says:

          Right Mikey, no one is coming for guns, except the politicians you support that say that they want to confiscate guns and are just waiting for a vote on their unconstitutional measure. It’s not like the governors of New York and Connecticut have mentioned wanting to seize weapons…wait, they did that. It’s not like Illinois wanted to ban all guns except bolt actions and revolvers and start seizing them…wait, they proposed that too. It’s not like Feinstein and company said that they want to confiscate scary looking weapons….wait, they’ve said that too.

          It’s very sad Mikey, that you’re incapable of learning the actual positions of your own teammates.

        • avatarLeo338 says:

          Go easy on this guy Totenglocke. He is merely an elementary ESL teacher. He worked 10 hard years to earn his GED that allowed him get that job. Let’s all let him feel special for a little while.

        • avatarMike Aguilar says:

          Actually, there was 2 years college, followed by 10 years Navy, followed by another 2 years college, followed by another 4 years of apprenticeship, and 2 more years of college.

          But that’s Ok. Whenever you want to go point for point with any recognized IQ test, let me know. I’ll be more than happy to humiliate ANY idiot that is a regular

          Totenglocke(Death Glocke): As an Independent, I have no “teammates.”

          Leo38: Look up Bellarmine College Prep. I graduated Class of 84 in the top 5% of the class. That means I was in the top 1% of everybody in the world that graduated from high school in 1984. And THAT is being conservative. I’m guessing you were LUCKY to graduate PUBLIC school?

        • avatarWLCE says:

          lets not send fearful electrons of physical violence over the internet.

          Look, Sir, can we be consistent here? you bombard yeager with criticisms over his threats of violence and cite that is the reason for more gun controls, then you turn around and offer to teach a “physical lesson”?

          im not trying to call anybody out, but lets be honest with each other here.

        • avatarMichael says:

          Yelling “fire” in a theater is not protected because of the potentially immediate and dangerous or deadly effect it might have on others when they stampede. Interestingly, it is not unprotected speech if there actually is a fire. Yeager’s rant is “probably” protected speech because of the precatory language and the general nature of the threat. That does not mean some over achieving prosecutor can’t charge him and get 12 people to convict him, simply that, eventually, a higher Court would likely reverse the sentence. A personal pyrrhic victory at best. Whether charged or not, he has done himself, and the movement he claims to support (2nd Amendment) much damage.

        • avatarWLCE says:

          i see you changed your comment Mike (or somebody changed it for you).

          dont have any more “physical lessons” to offer anybody that disagrees with you?

        • avatarMike Aguilar says:

          I don’t change my comments.

      • avatarWLCE says:

        you bring up a good point ralph. ill say that i agree with you.

        of course the 1st amendment died a while ago. this is a example http://www.salon.com/2012/10/11/third_northwest_activist_jailed_for_staying_silent/

        Leah-Lynn Plante. Another victim of the “war on terror” police state. freedom of expression and the 1st amendment have been forfeited for “security”.

        This is precisely WHY WE SHOLDNT GIVE A INCH. these f^cking psychopaths will victimize everybody, not just lawful gun owners, that dont frequently give them fellatio and lick their boots.

        • avatarMike Aguilar says:

          Actually, I’ve got a BS in aeronautical engineering. For those that are too stupid to understand, that means I design aircraft. I* won’t even say nice try.

        • avatar16V says:

          Ooh wow, a BS in Aero. Wanna discuss wing curves and NACA ducts? I could CLEP that degree in my sleep.

        • avatarMike Aguilar says:

          16V, you’re talking about the so-called “Patriot” Act that your idol Dubya pushed through Congress. And his statements that if you disagreed with his actions and policies you were un-American.

        • avatarAlphaGeek says:

          16V, I think the comeback loses its sting a bit when it’s on a 2-day delay. :)

  10. avatarLarry says:

    I’ve learned a few things as an amateur bee keeper: Bees are curious creatures, one minute they are flying around happily making honey, doing their business. You can even have your hand/head in the hive; if you are being careful, showing them respect, and posing no threat. However the minute you squash one or pose a real threat, the bee(s) become one stinging super-organism. If you get one bee sting, you usually get multiple. Just saying.

  11. avatarRob says:

    James Yeager, in his defense, (I’m just playing Devil’s Advocate here, no need to flame me that hard…) does have his good moments. His non-political stuff, his “fighting pistol” and “fighting rifle” videos for example, do have a lot of good information. Are they perfect? Nope, but they do contain a lot of information that the beginning shooter can use in their own defense.

    Although that was 10-15 years ago, before he went full-biker-gang-zombie-killer with his style.

    Until Mr. Yeager drops off the grid, gives up his comfortable living standards, and goes full guerilla-warrior taking out elected officials and their bureaucratic underlings, and ends up going out in a blaze of glory with his arms outstretched, screaming a war-cry to the heavens, with his AK slung across his chest from a hellfire missile fire from an unmanned drone while standing atop of Theodore Roosevelt’s head on Mt. Rushmore in a bid to enter Valhalla, he’s all bark, and no bite.

    (Tell me that wouldn’t be an awesome ending to that movie you’d all like to see made about James Yeager’s life!!)

    • avatargyrfalcon says:

      Hitler had some good moments too. Look at all the innovation that he helped spawn during his rule.

      Yeager is a dolt, and it’s stupid to come to his aid. Just like it was stupid of him to have a photographer downrange during a live shoot.

      Let the bus run over this self proclaimed expert and lets move on.

  12. avatarSammy says:

    He seems to be most effective in giving example to the grabbers fears. When you are demonizing a group always go to the lunatic fringe and label them the norm. To liberal bed wetters, we are he.

  13. avatarJR LORENCZ says:

    Mr. Ed used to be a far right shock-jock. Now he’s a far left shock-jock. He either follows the money, or is clinically schizzo. I suspect the later.

    For our side, we new fewer Yaeger meisters and more Ben Shapiros.

    If you haven’t seen his clock cleaning of the imperious Piers, you must.

  14. avatarAaron says:

    Yeager has recanted hi statements… HOWEVER, Ed Schultz is being a fucking hypocrite: he for the longest time said that “I AM A GUN TOTING LIBERAL!” (I know because I USED TO watch his show) I bet he still totes those guns around, and is now hiding that fact for political gain. Sickening.

    • avatarMike Aguilar says:

      How is owning a gun and thinking we need responsible gun laws hypocrisy? Nowhere has he EVER said that no American citizen should be allowed to own a gun. UNTIL and UNLESS he says something like that, his call for responsible gun laws is nothing more than a call for sanity in a country slowly approaching ‘One Flew Over the Cuckoos Nest” insanity.

      • avatarHal says:

        More or less, this is where that will take us in terms of progression:

        1) “All we’re really asking for is responsible gun laws.”

        2) “All we’re really saying is that all guns should be registered”

        3) “Guns have no purpose besides sporting applications”

        4) “No gun needs a detachable magazine”

        5) “No gun should hold more than a single round.”

        6) “Gun sports are evil. No guns outside the home.”

        7) “Why do you even need a gun? Everyone turn them in by the end of the month or you’re now a felon.”

        This one may take a while:

        8) “You’re goung to have to come with us. Don’t worry about where you’re going. No you don’t need your coat. You don’t need to bring a thing. Just step into this train car for me…”

        • avatarOld Ben turning in grave says:

          Except for the train ride, this is an openly stated strategy. Incremental disarmorment. I think someone else said “there are no gun grabbers” which is either ignorant or dishonest. Of course there are control advocates who are not gun grabbers. In a broader context, Joe Stalin called such people “useful idiots.”

      • avatarTotenglocke says:

        Ah yes, the myth of “responsible” gun control. That’s worked out SO well in other countries….. My grandmother grew up in a major first world country that, when she was in high school, decided to implement “reasonable” gun control. Not too long after, she had her best friends family vanish in the night and taken to a government facility where they were eventually executed. She and her family then spent the next few years on the run, having to leave everything they owned behind, from their own government because they would be murdered for not supporting the government if they were caught.

        People like you sat there and made excuses about how “nothing bad is going to happen” and “we just want to stop crime”. Only an idiot would listen to your lies again after we’ve seen what it leads to.

      • avatarJoke & Dagger says:

        Take your “responsible” and shove it. We know the Imperialists code words around here.

        • avatarMike Aguilar says:

          So, in other words, you don’t give a damn if your kids find your guns and take them to school, or if some burglar finds them in your nightstand and then uses them in a murder and drops them, implicating YOU.

          To me, RESPONSIBLE ownership means making DAMN sure the wrong person can’t get MY gun. THAT means a biometric handgun safe and a rifle safe with a combination lock. The combination to which I will take to the grave.

          Here’s your tin foil hat. I’m guessing you also think that the Twin Towers were brought down by a controlled demolition??

        • avatarWLCE says:

          “I’m guessing you also think that the Twin Towers were brought down by a controlled demolition??”

          they dont but i do and you can talk to Dr. Niels Harrit, http://nielsharrit.org/

          let me guess: you believe that osama bin laden…nevermind.

          iraq had weapons of ….. oh wait. they didnt. but im sure you believe it was a spetsnaz plot to smuggle them out of the country LOL.

      • avatarWLCE says:

        “UNTIL and UNLESS he says something like that, his call for responsible gun laws is nothing more than a call for sanity in a country slowly approaching ‘One Flew Over the Cuckoos Nest” insanity.”

        except that is blown way out of proportion. violent crime has decreased, not increased over the past 20 years despite more guns being purchased by civilians in that time frame.

        • avatarTotenglocke says:

          Not just decreased, decreased a LOT. The early 60′s was when crime took off in the US (well, after the end of Prohibition and the gangster crime era) and it kept going up and up until the early 90′s. It peaked in ’91 and since then it’s dropped like a rock – 57% drop in the murder rate (from 9.8 in ’91 to 4.2 in 2011 – the lowest level in 50 years) and all other crimes have been cut in half. That’s astounding considering it took us 30 years to go the opposite direction and since they kept passing anti-gun legislation during those 30 years, we can clearly see that gun control doesn’t work.

        • avatarWLCE says:

          im afraid i didnt emphasize the intensity enough ;)

          i am baffled as to why “assault weapons with high capacity magazine clips” are the issue. somehow the children of sandy hook are “more dead” than the ones in chicago and other metropolitan areas that were killed by handguns or other means. Not that im encouraging legislation against handguns, dont mistake my position.

          Everybody knows the annual number of americans killed by long guns (rifle and shotgun) is significantly less than handguns and the number total gun crimes by “assault weapons” (with mags larger than 10 rounds) is roughly 1%.

          Why are we even talking about “assault weapons”!?!?!? that is a giant Non Sequitur if there ever was one focusing purely on emotion rather than logic.

          then they throw in the red herrings (stinger missiles, nuclear bombs, ad nauseum)….

          they point out the lobbying of the NRA but conveniently ignore the lobbying by big pharma and the implications of SSRI’s. mysterious silence shrouds the MSM as usual.

        • avatarOld Ben turning in grave says:

          “Tinfoil hat?” Dude, look at history. Mike, if you think it is paranoid to say that democratic societies can and do fall to tyranny, I can’t understand where you are coming from. Perhaps you mean that you think it can’t happen here? Your crystal ball is a hell of a lot less cloudy than mine.

  15. avatartjlarson2k says:

    All we need to do is point out we (“pro-gun”) folks, think Yeager is ridiculous too. And that anyone, that is a reasonable person and familiar with Yeager’s “character” didn’t see his video as a credible threat.

    Sure, to the politician that has never seen or heard of Yeager before, he seems scary. But he’s just a character on Youtube. Considering his entire livelihood revolves around firearms and the ownership of such, it’s very unlikely he would throw all of that away on a whim. Any reasonable person knows the government isn’t going to be demanding our firearms at gunpoint tomorrow or in the immediate future.

    Could it happen? Sure. Is the time right now? Don’t be silly.

    But this is assuming people are smart enough to do their own research and keep a level head in today’s media-driven emotional roller coaster society we live in. It’s sad when society starts to react to real events like the idiots in reality TV do.

    Frankly, it’s embarrassing.

    • avatarRalph says:

      Any reasonable person knows the government isn’t going to be demanding our firearms at gunpoint tomorrow or in the immediate future.

      Then I must be unreasonable.

      • avatartjlarson2k says:

        No, you’re just paranoid. And there’s nothing wrong with that. To each their own. I’d rather not buy into a self-created conspiracy theory, thank you.

        Unless you’re privy to some sort of super secret plan the government has to kick down your door tomorrow.

        What possible benefit could be gained trying to forcefully attack the public and gun owners when they’re already armed?

        It’s one thing to be prepared for “what if” scenarios, and it’s another thing to have common sense.

        I’m not saying our government may never go after our firearms. I’m saying it’s not going to happen tomorrow. They have lots of legislation to even reach that point, and by then they’ll get massive resistance. It’s not going to happen. And if they really try to push the issue, well, then things will get messy and at which point, politics won’t matter.

        • avatarAccur81 says:

          The National Guard confiscated privately – owned firearms in New Orleans after hurricane Katrina.

        • avatarMike Aguilar says:

          Ah-huh and there was this little thing called “Martial Law’ declared. I’m guessing that since you’re still tasting what you ate last week, you weren’t aware of that.

        • avatarMike Aguilar says:

          MARTIAL LAW. For an 8 year old, it isn’t a difficult concept people. Except for complete idiots.

      • avatarJoke & Dagger says:

        “Common sense”. Another one of the Progressive code words. You grabbers are hitting them all today.

      • avatarDaniel Silverman says:

        Ok people keep saying that no one is coming for your guns and you are just paranoid.
        What about the legislation which was introduced in Illinois? It targeted almost every modern firearm produced in the last 30 years minimum. They were about as close to confiscation as we have seen.
        DiFi her self is on video talking about getting everyone to turn them all in. Last I checked, she is still in office and the force behind the next AWB.
        These are facts. These are disputable.
        How is this not an attempt to come after my guns?

        • avatarMike Aguilar says:

          Do you mean this piece of legislation out of Illinois?:
          http://www.ilga.gov/legislation/ilcs/ilcs3.asp?ActID=1657&ChapterID=39

          (430 ILCS 65/) Firearm Owners Identification Card Act.

          (430 ILCS 65/0.01) (from Ch. 38, par. 83-0.1)
          Sec. 0.01. Short title. This Act may be cited as the Firearm Owners Identification Card Act.
          (Source: P.A. 86-1324.)

          Looks to me like it’s a piece of legislation that would mean gun owners would have to carry an ID card.

          If not, here’s another list of pending legislation. Which one are you so worried about? Some of them appear pretty old
          http://www.isra.org/legislation/

        • avatartjlarson2k says:

          You’re missing the point I’m making Daniel.

          I said there’s a difference between being cautious and well-informed and active vs. being paranoid like Ralph and just yelling, “They’re coming after me! OMG!”.

          Ralph makes it sound like the government or whatever boogeyman is about to invade his home and take his firearms.

          What I’m saying is, are they trying to force legislation through to limit access to certain firearms? Yes. Do they have a larger plan to disarm the public en masse. Who knows. Ralph has no facts to back up his paranoia.

          In the meantime can we fight this impending legislation with our votes and calls to our representatives? Yes.

          If there were 100 steps from just talking about legislation to a completely disarmed state, we’re probably at step 1.

          Ralph thinks we’re at step 80. See the difference? I think it’s just as irresponsible to start acting like they’re “coming fer my guns!” when they haven’t yet.

          Are they thinking about it? Well after Sandy Hook, you can bet a lot of left politicians are. And it’s the responsibility of the right to balance them out.

          Until they start winning and passing legislation hand over fist, then you can start taking more drastic measures. Sure you can “prep” all you want, but being paranoid and acting like the sky is falling helps no one.

      • avatar16V says:

        For all the supposed learning and time in the service, Mike you apparently have no idea what martial law means.

        Just because it is declared does not mean that soldiers automatically confiscate firearms. It does not mean that they even generally confiscate firearms. It would just make it “legal”, although extra-judicial.

  16. avatarSaul Feldstein says:

    As the leftists say Alex Jones should be shot, and joke about killing whites on Saturday Night Live, we are supposed to defer to gentlemanly discourse?

    Yeah, that worked great for the GOP in the last 2 election cycles.

    Yeager might have “gone too far” but the left has been going too far for decades.

    Maybe Yeager speaks for the silent majority.

    • avatar.9mm says:

      There is a video clip of Piers Morgan talking about machine gunning some folks on Britains Got Talent. One of them being Jeremy Clarkson from Top Gear who once punched Morgan in the face lol. Just one of the many reasons that Clarkson is so cool.

      • avatarTotenglocke says:

        Plus, Clarkson loves guns. The last time I know of that Top Gear was in the US they did a bit where they were simulating a drive-by and shooting out of the passenger seat of a car. Hammond and Captain Slow used pistols – Jeremy somehow got ahold of an M16.

  17. avatarSmaj says:

    No one watches Fat Ed or that pompous Brit. I’d also bet they both either have guns of their own or have armed security. Hypocrisy, thy name is Schultz. Or that other twit. Yeager beclowned himself with that stupid rant and didn’t do 2A supporters any good. They are all entitled to their opinions, however deluded.

  18. avatarDavid says:

    If Yeager had been female and hot this would not have happened. Seriously, get a hot gun chick to say the exact same thing – maybe that one from gunsmoke – and I guarantee the gun grabber response and ours would be much much different. Man possesses both emotion and the capacity to use logic. Yeager looks like a criminal in the minds of many even though there is no “look”. Context is everything and people process information thru a filter of their own experience.

    Remember along time ago when Ice-T released “Cop Killer”? He was even caught on camera talking about killing cops. Since he has gone on to portray a cop on TV. Race can be a factor in that whole “context” thing.

  19. avatarLance says:

    He is a idiot and his rant gave the enemy ammo against us. Help NRA and others to show real gun owners. The real NRA campaign relaunch will help alot.

    • avatarSaul Feldstein says:

      Certainly the NRA will not crumble like they did in 1968, 1986, and 1994.

      Anybody who thinks the NRA will stand up for their black rifles is a fool.

      • avatarJosef says:

        Spot on. I raised this point on TheFiringLine yesterday and the moderators locked the thread. Seriously, what is going on with that site?

        • avatarSaul Feldstein says:

          Dont know about that, but the premise that Yeager somehow “shamed” the RKBA crowd shows the factionalism between the shotgun duck guys and the black rifle crowd.

          Like him or hate him, Yeager simply voiced his opinion of what he thought should be done if this govt becomes an explicit tyranny, opposed to the de facto situation that exists now.

          The 2nd amendment was intended to ensure the govt was afraid of the people, not the other way around.

          Yeagers 1st amendment rights are being squelched by the very same crowd who wants their 2nd amendment rights protected.

  20. avatarNelson says:

    People need to stop paying attention to the likes of MSDNC and CNNCommunist-comedyNewsNetwork and FauxNewsChumps’ 50,000~500,000 viewer audience shows.

    Americans have enjoyed almost a century of television and TV medium, yet, it never ceases to amaze me how utterly cluelessly gullible most are of the obvious, feigned indignant-bad ACTING committed by politicians/politicos/journalists State-PR propagandists/scribes/modern-day court jesters of yore, on a daily basis!

    As Gerald Celente puts it: “Politics is Hollywood for Ugly People.”

    No truer words have been said. Which makes those who cover those who are “too ugly” for Hollyweird, like Chris ‘Tourette Motormouth’ Matthews Tweety, Crazy Ed ‘PsychoTalk’ Schultz, Brill O’Really Pad, Sean Insanities of the world, even FUGLIER.

    These are literally nobodies, especially in their TV/Film entertainment industry universe.

    These a-holes live in a world where ratings is everything: even when a great cable TV show is simul-cast worldwide to millions of global audience, but if that same show gets less than 1.5 million American viewers, they cancel it. Well, most of these cable-’news’ shows have on average between 50,000~500,000 viewers, and are still kept on air.

    When’s the last time you’ve ever seen TV execs keep a show that loses money, still on air? The days of ‘news is supposed to be a money-losing venture’ is gone, since they all found out that CBS 60min. can and does make money.

    So, any meda-savvy geopolitical observer would have to conclude that they’re kept on air, purely for propagandistic purposes. Nothing more.

    Now, if those money-losing ventures were informing, it would be wholly another matter, but as we all know, their bread and butter is Justin Bieber/Kardashians/Lohan coverage, as ‘news.’ And, for these very same worthless nobody a-holes to feign empathy… for anything, as if they all suddenly, collectively had cathartic conscience-awakening when politically opportune tragedies like Sandy Hook Massacre occur, one would have to be truly delusional to take these morons seriously.

    And, if you are one of those who do, guess who the real sucker is, in all this: you.

    Sheeple are sheeple, precisely because they’re the moron herd.

    But, for those of us who are supposed to be more media savvy should know better than to get apoplectic about TV-whores whose shows have subzero ratings (which in their world is by definition a “fringe”); alert people should not conflate multi-million dollars sets and contracts, with actual popular opinion: one should not confuse vox populi, with manufactured consent.

    These same MSM a-holes all love calling the likes of Alex Jones as “fringe?” Well, he has over 1.5~2million radio listeners a day, but if you add his XM, internet live-stream, daily Youtube posts, nightly news TV segments, shortwave, daily mirrored video & audio internet streams, he in fact has more than 5 million+ audience, per day!

    Piers Morgan, on the other hand, had his highest rated show ever… when Alex Jones was on: 800,000 viewers.

    The day after, PM’s show spiked to 1 mil. The day after that, it dropped to less than 800,000 viewers, again. Piers Moron’s show, on his best day, if lucky, has less than 500,000 viewers.

    Do the reality math.

    These MSM propagandists are living in a la la land.

    The only ones who are moronic enough to tune into these shows, to actually get informed (and not view it as idiot propaganda vigilance/entertainment), are from the wired-click-and-control Motorola ‘selector’ remote days, who actually still delude that the American MSM isn’t as State-whorish as the original Pravda.

    Yes indeed, I ‘get’ that to the sheeple populace, perception is ‘reality.’ But, for the rest of us, it will only remain a ‘reality,’ if you do not know that you’re being lied to.

  21. avatarAharon says:

    America has about 90 million(?) gun owners. Most non-gun-owners know at least one person who owns a gun. Some non-gun-owners grew up with gun owners or have friends/relatives who own guns. Those non-owners know that Yeager is not like the vast majority of gun owners. Yeah, Yeager might be the poster child for the grabbers. I think that he mostly makes the case to have a national database of the mentally loonie. Yeager might also be a motivation for people to go out and buy guns for the first time because they recognize America has too many loonies on the street.

  22. avatarctay says:

    Angelina Jolie, Brad Pitt, Miranda Lambert, Howard Stern, Donald Trump, Johnny Depp, Eric Clapton, James Earl Jones, David Spade, Sarah Michelle Gellar, Laura Prepon, Chef Alton Brown, Jennifer Lawrence, Shaquille O’Neal, Tom Selleck, Kurt Russell, Bruce Willis, Ice-T, Gary Sinise, Chuck Norris, Vince Vaughan, Jon Voight, Demi Moore, Ashton Kutcher, Milla Jovovich, Rosario Dawson, Kate Beckinsale, Penn Gillette, to name a few, are all historically pro-gun and had every chance to speak against the threat to the 2nd Amendment and have chosen not to (or at least I haven’t seen it).

    As such, we are relegated to hearing about nutjobs like Alex Jones and Yeager. It’s not that the above celebs opinions matter more than the average Joe, but they are recognizable to the general public and have profited greatly from the freedom this country has brought them. They have just as much responsibility to speak up pro gun as the leftist hypocrite celebs feel the need to speak for gun control.

    • avatarSaul Feldstein says:

      By your standards Patrick Henry in todays society would have been arrested, disarmed, committed to an appropriate mental health institution, pumped full of Prozac and Seroquel, and written up by the media as a “right wing unbalanced possible milita member radical domestic terrorist” for his obviously suicidal sociopathic utterance:

      “Give me liberty or give me death.”

      • avatarctay says:

        So Yeager is now akin to Patrick Henry? That’s funny and a bit far reaching. Though I don’t necessarily agree to his permit being yanked because of what he said, barking random threats doesn’t add anything of value to this debate other than make himself look foolish and stereotype otherwise responsible gun owners. And no, I have no faith he’s a domestic terrorist and be medicated, though he’d probably like to be labeled one, bark about it some more, then mark his video private and see what audience he can generate.

        Jones, on the other hand, would be more akin to a stuttering town crier where the message holds some value, but the delivery leaves much to be desired.

        • avatarMike Aguilar says:

          No. Patrick Henry’s “Give me liberty or give me death” comment (1) came in the middle of a REVOLUTION, and (2) was threatening nobody.

        • avatarIhatehillbillies says:

          lol patrick henry was also a slaveowner, you pathetic hillbilly guntrash

  23. avatarTacticalDad says:

    This reminds me of what my Drill instructor told some smart ass reservist in my platoon about our “rights” as US Marines. His reply: “Freedom of Speech is not free, you will PAY for everything you say”. And then proceeded to thrash all of us for a good hour.

    • avatargyrfalcon says:

      “Freedom of Speech is not free, you will PAY for everything you say”.

      When do we eat lunch? They told me three square meals a day when I signed up!

  24. avatareugene says:

    “‘fear and loading”

    really? that’s the best line they cab come up with?

  25. avatarMike Aguilar says:

    I’m really wondering how many idiots that post on boards/groups like this have actually served in the military. I’m guessing that number is less than 1%.

    • avatarLeo338 says:

      FLAME DELETED

    • avatarWLCE says:

      i have. i served in the US Army and as a DOD Contractor…walked away completely.

      lack of service in the military does not make opposition’s points any less valid.

      • avatargyrfalcon says:

        “lack of service in the military does not make opposition’s points any less valid.”

        You’ve never been downrange in the @#$% man… you don’t know, you don’t know anything until you’ve hunted man!

        :)

    • avatarAccur81 says:

      Mike A.,

      6 1/2 years USMCR, ending as an infantry platoon sergeant. Honorably discharged. I’m currently a full time peace officer in SoCal, and I’ve been there for a dozen years. Since I actually care about the Constitution and the 2nd A, I’m full blooded American. I must also confess that I’m not terribly perplexed by your comments.

      As an adult I can see that you are doing your best to contribute to this forum, but if you don’t appreciate the commenters you are welcome to go elsewhere. If you stay you’ll find that there is more experience here regarding firearms and freedom than few other places in the world.

    • avatarRon says:

      Mike Aguilar,
      I’m fairly certain that I’m not the only guy here who has a Combat Infantryman’s Badge hanging in his shadow box on the wall. I’ve noticed that the people who do the most posting here, and who voice their opinions the loudest seem to also be the ones who base most of their statements on assumptions and broad generalizations. There are many of us here who have undoubtedly made more sacrifices for this nation and spilled more blood in its defense than you did in your time in the Navy. I thank you for your honorable service, however a little humility on your part would go a long way towards people taking your comments seriously. You should be ashamed of the lack of respect you have shown fellow veterans, while demanding it of yourself. You have a 150 IQ. You’re an accomplished academic. You put all of us to shame with your reading comprehension and research prowess. We get it. Bravo. Now how about having a reasonable and respectful conversation. Is that asking too much?

      • avatarMike Aguilar says:

        Yep. No problem, Ron. As soon as I see some semblance of logic and intelligence, we can have a logical and intelligent conversation. Your post was one of the few that had those perquisites.

        However, I would be surprised if you were correct in your assumption that most people posting some of the tripe here have your qualifications.

        That said, I echo your sentiment: Thank you for your honorable service, sir.

        • avatarpat says:

          Are you an academic god? A millionaire? A libtard!!!

        • avatarMike Aguilar says:

          Wow.

          No. But I did keep maturing emotionally after 3rd grade. You……not so much.

          I’ll put my academic record and test scores against you any day. I’ll be nice, since you obviously didn’t go very far academically, I’ll truncate my record to 5th grade so you can keep up.

        • avatarpat says:

          College degree. But its my millions where I beat you.

        • avatarMike Aguilar says:

          College degree means nothing. Millions means nothing. Neither guarantees intelligence OR logic. Just an inflated sense of self-worth.

        • avatarpat says:

          Are you like Spock…..Data? At least they (fictional, of course) had cool powers beyond smarts. Are we supposed to bow in awe to those ivory tower professors (assuming you are somehow in their snobby league) who dont live in the real world, but tell us unwashed masses how things ‘really work’?
          Self worth? Now there is a subject spanning the academic universe. Sadly, it might bridge from the IQ to the EQ (emotional intelligence).
          Mr Spock was half human……so maybe your Spock.

        • avatarIhatehillbillies says:

          pat. kill yourself hillbilly guntrash. lol

        • avatarpat says:

          Is a millionaire with a college degree Hillbilly guntrash? I live in Seattle, WA.

        • avatarMike Aguilar says:

          Pat,

          I’m not so sure I believe any of what you said, but, pretending that I did, how come you didn’t study reading comprehension and directing comments at the right person? Take a look at my responses and see if any of them even IMPLIED that you, or anyone else for that matter, was hillbilly white trash? Ok. See if you can manage that.

        • avatarpat says:

          Uhh….look at the post directly above mine and try to follow. Even Ihatehillbillies can do that (and God, that aint saying much). How on earth can anyone be sure to believe anything someone says on an internet forum? I do know that you and I are on a quantum higher level of dialogue than this igatehillbillies freak (which really aint much of a pat on the back for either of us).

        • avatarMike Aguilar says:

          LOL. Ok. I have to agree with you there! LOL

  26. avatargyrfalcon says:

    James Yeager should only be a poster child for roid rage, and idiocy.

    He is a self-made fool like Alex Jones.

    Get off my side!

  27. avatarEdward says:

    Hey Aguilar you might want to try maybe getting a job or doing something more productive then arguing with people in the comment section of a blog, and writing your “Life story” here… Once you have to start bringing up you entire “life story” to back up your statements your credibility ends there. In which case i, and im sure most people not only dont believe anything you’ve said, but honestly could not care any less if we tried. You obviously have too much time on your hands buddy!

    Im sure you will reply to this, but know your idiocy will fall upon deaf ears as i wont be returning to this article to read any of your arbitrary bullshit.

  28. avatarMike Aguilar says:

    Mike knows his personal worth is that of 5 of you morons combined. ANd his intelligence worth is closer to 10 of you.

  29. avatarMike Aguilar says:

    Comment deleted.

Leave a Reply

Please use your real name instead of you company name or keyword spam.